1 Month Rolling Contract Template

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    1 Month Rolling Contract Template

    Hi All,

    Can anyone point me in the direction of a template for a monthly rolling contract?

    Was using Purple Bricks, and the 6 month contract ended. Have decided not to continue to use them as the management company, whilst the tennants would like to go onto a monthly rolling contact - so I need to knock one up and get it signed.

    Looked on Property Hawk but not sure this template generator can be used for monthly contracts?
    https://www.propertyhawk.co.uk/pm3s/pm3freeast.htm

    Or, do I just put the Tenancy Term In Months as 1?

    Cheers,
    Dave

    #2
    If tenants have finished fixed term it is a monthly rolling contract, just do nothing
    I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

    Comment


      #3
      the issue that I think I have there is that they signed the initial 6 month term with Purple Bricks, but as I/they are no longer with them a new one needs to be drawn up?

      in any case, one of the tennants wants to move out end of August and another move in, with the other tenant remaining, still on a 1 month rolling contract - am happy to do this, but want to do it properly and to do that I would assume I need to draw up a new contract?

      Comment


        #4
        Who or what is named as landlord in original tenancy? If you, all is fine. If PB big problem
        I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

        Comment


          #5
          I can't imagine that purple bricks won't have a view on whether you can simply opt out of continuing to use their service(s).
          Presumably purple bricks are acting as an agent, so the tenant's contract is with you as landlord, and you have a separate agreement with purple bricks, with it's own terms and conditions.

          If the tenants are joint and several (there's on contract for all of them to occupy one property and they're described as "the tenant"), one can't leave and be replaced*. What is happening is that one tenancy is going to end and another one is beginning. The incoming new person should be subject to all the same vetting as any new tenant, and all issues relating to damage and the deposit resolved. Ideally, there should be a formal check out of the old tenant and formal check in of the new.

          *It is theoretically possible and a lot of agents do it routinely, but it's almost impossible to get right, and you have endless issues if anything goes wrong.
          When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
          Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by theartfullodger View Post
            Who or what is named as landlord in original tenancy? If you, all is fine. If PB big problem
            I am named as the landlord

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
              I can't imagine that purple bricks won't have a view on whether you can simply opt out of continuing to use their service(s).
              Presumably purple bricks are acting as an agent, so the tenant's contract is with you as landlord, and you have a separate agreement with purple bricks, with it's own terms and conditions.

              If the tenants are joint and several (there's on contract for all of them to occupy one property and they're described as "the tenant"), one can't leave and be replaced*. What is happening is that one tenancy is going to end and another one is beginning. The incoming new person should be subject to all the same vetting as any new tenant, and all issues relating to damage and the deposit resolved. Ideally, there should be a formal check out of the old tenant and formal check in of the new.

              *It is theoretically possible and a lot of agents do it routinely, but it's almost impossible to get right, and you have endless issues if anything goes wrong.
              I am able to opt out of the services outside of the agreed term - been with them over 12 months on 2 6 month contracts, the tenants went onto a rolling contract at start of June

              as a new tenant is moving in, I want to set up a new contract in their name - and as am allowing them to remain on a one month rolling contract, am looking for an appropriate template

              so do you think this template would suffice if I put the duration in as 1 month?
              https://www.propertyhawk.co.uk/pm3s/pm3freeast.htm


              Comment


                #8
                There's not a lot of point entering into a 1-month tenancy agreement as a landlord.
                You can't serve s21 notice until the start of the 4th month, so your tenants would be in a better position than you - which isn't particularly sensible.


                When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                  There's not a lot of point entering into a 1-month tenancy agreement as a landlord.
                  You can't serve s21 notice until the start of the 4th month, so your tenants would be in a better position than you - which isn't particularly sensible.
                  Four months run from original tenancy, so wouldn't be an issue if this is a replacement tenancy. Of course, there's not usually a whole lot of point agreeing a CPT when the tenant is already on a SPT.
                  I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

                  I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by KTC View Post
                    Four months run from original tenancy, so wouldn't be an issue if this is a replacement tenancy. Of course, there's not usually a whole lot of point agreeing a CPT when the tenant is already on a SPT.
                    The tenant's going to be different - it might be stretching the "substantially the same" requirement a bit (not that it's precise in the first place!)
                    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                      The tenant's going to be different - it might be stretching the "substantially the same" requirement a bit (not that it's precise in the first place!)
                      Sorry, I missed that. In that case, it wouldn't qualify as a replacement tennacy. Ignore my previous post!
                      I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

                      I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                        You can't serve s21 notice until the start of the 4th month...
                        Start of the 5th month

                        daveash, just use a standard AST with a 6 month term or you are going to make this very complicated. A rolling monthly tenancy will follow it automatically.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by KTC View Post
                          Sorry, I missed that. In that case, it wouldn't qualify as a replacement tenancy. Ignore my previous post!
                          It's an interesting point though - the substantially the same wording has always bothered me, how substantially is substantially?

                          There's obviously a reason that "identical" isn't used - and I can see that it's possibly intended for the situation where a tenant might move between flats or rooms in the same building, but I can't see how you'd apply it to the landlord or the tenant unless there is scope for them to meet the criteria but not be identical.


                          Originally posted by DPT57 View Post
                          Start of the 5th month
                          Quite right - getting old - thought after and wrote start of.
                          ​​​​​​​
                          When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                          Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                            There's obviously a reason that "identical" isn't used - and I can see that it's possibly intended for the situation where a tenant might move between flats or rooms in the same building, but I can't see how you'd apply it to the landlord or the tenant unless there is scope for them to meet the criteria but not be identical.
                            You don't. The identity of the landlord and tenant is a seperate subclause to the premises.

                            For the purposes of this section, a replacement tenancy is a tenancy—

                            (a)which comes into being on the coming to an end of an assured shorthold tenancy, and

                            (b)under which, on its coming into being—

                            ....(i) the landlord and tenant are the same as under the earlier tenancy as at its coming to an end, and

                            ....(ii) the premises let are the same or substantially the same as those let under the earlier tenancy as at that time.
                            I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

                            I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Shouldn't post from my phone from memory without checking the source!
                              When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                              Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X